Cases where the two trademarks of "TERRACIN" and "TTRACIN" are similar to each other that the two trademarks are likely to cause confusion in the trade.

상표 "ＴＥＲＲＡＣＩＮ"과 상표 "ＴＥＴＲＡＣＩＮ"은 외관상 철자에 있어 각 제3문자에 "Ｔ"와 "Ｒ"의 차이가 있기는 하나 전체적으로 관찰할 때 유사하고 또 칭호에 있어서도 "Ｔ"는 "트"로 "Ｒ"은 "르"로 발음되는 차이는 있으나 역시 전체적, 이격적으로 관찰하면 "테라신"과 "테트라신"은 서로 유사하여 거래상 혼동, 오인의 염려가 있는 경우에 해당한다.

Article 5 of the Trademark Act, Article 29 (1) of the Trademark Act

(C) commercial corporations: commercial corporations;

East Asia Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Patent Court Decision 100 delivered on July 5, 1968

The original adjudication shall be destroyed.

The case shall be remanded to the appeal court by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy.

The ground of appeal by claimant's representative is examined.

In light of the reasoning of the original decision, the trademark at issue is not similar to the registered trademark at issue in terms of appearance, name, and concept of appearance. However, the similarity of trademark under the Trademark Act should be determined by whether two trademarks used for the same kind of product are likely to cause confusion or misunderstanding in trade by objectively, overall, and differently observing the appearance, name, and concept thereof, as a whole, and whether there is a risk of confusion or misunderstanding. In addition, it should be viewed as a similar trademark if the phrase constituting the essential part is similar to each other in the overall observation, so the claimant's assertion is similar to the registered trademark of the claimant because (a) mark is deemed as the essential part of the trademark at issue and it is similar to the trademark of the claimant at issue. Thus, it is difficult to see that two trademarks used for the same kind of product at issue are similar to the trademark at issue in comparison with the trademark at issue, and it is difficult to see that there is a difference between "TTRAIN" and "TTRAIN," as a whole, it is difficult to see that it is similar to see the phrase "t" as a combination" as a whole.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, and the case is remanded to the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy for a trial by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court